The grievous lapses of government agencies tasked with execution of Plan projects are reported to have taken a heavy toll on the Plan fund absorption rate in the State.
According to a critical Secretary-level appraisal of the Plan performance conducted on a directive from Chief Secretary Jiji Thomson on May 22, only 68 per cent of the Rs.15,300-crore State sector outlay has been utilised during the past financial year.
Similarly, the Plan expenditure, including the share of local self-government institutions, is only 71 per cent against an outlay of Rs.20,000 crore.
The absorption rate is far below the 83 per cent recorded in 2013-14.
The expenditure against the Central share of the Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS) is only 57 per cent.
The same is true in the case of Externally Aided Projects, wherein only 59 per cent of the funds have been expended. Against an outlay of Rs.1,225 crore provided under Major Infrastructure Development Projects, the government has utilised only Rs.416 crore, 34 per cent of the funds provided.
This is indicative of the declining trend in expenditure and that the implementing agencies have failed to utilise the budgeted outlay.
This is a matter of serious concern, the Plan review report says.
Of the 39 administrative departments involved in the implementation and monitoring of the Plan process, the performance of 17 departments is much below the State average. The report says that laxity in according administrative sanction is reflected in the fund utilisation rate too. The meeting also took a look at glitches in the execution process.
Various factors
From delay in land acquisition to finalisation of tenders for various projects, the committee has identified a number of reasons that derailed the implementation process. The committee has also recorded that funds for projects were held back on technical or other grounds. There was a delay on the part of the Union government in providing funds for the CSS. The committee feels that revision of project estimates with high cost, high amounts quoted against estimated cost, non-availability of land, and paucity of feasible projects and eligible applicants have also affected the entire process.
